It's already a no-brainer to borrow long term in USD and buy and hold BTC.

What we're waiting for to see hyperbitcoinization is for that knowledge to rapidly spread through the pool of potential borrowers.

This is pretty much the limiting factor. As a rough barometer, I think I saw some poll of investors recently that said ~55% of them thought bitcoin was a terrible investment, or that it was in a bubble. Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not? Is there a single event, or chain of events that would change this perception, or do we watch the number slowly fall until the remainder can't stem the tide?

Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

no. we've seen perception and buying pressure rise several times during the run ups over the last several years. ppl get MORE bullish with the price rises. it's a feedback loop like justus was saying. and it doesn't just exist in Bitcoin. it's true for all markets.

Sorry for not speaking your language and forgive my noobishness, but if that reddit post is true I might want to reconsider selling Bitcoin for fiat anytime soon?

If I were you, I would reconsider even if it were proven false.

Thanks, yes I am not planning on selling anytime soon, but I just wanted to check with more knowledgable people in this thread if my conclusion after reading that post was right. English is not my first language. Thank you for your reply.

This is pretty much the limiting factor. As a rough barometer, I think I saw some poll of investors recently that said ~55% of them thought bitcoin was a terrible investment, or that it was in a bubble. Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

You want a certain number of people to remain sceptical of Bitcoin for as long as possible, especially among the people who lend USD.

Is there a single event, or chain of events that would change this perception, or do we watch the number slowly fall until the remainder can't stem the tide?

Hyperbitcoinization is the last bubble in the USD/BTC exchange rate.

All the prior speculative manias collapse when the infrastructure can no longer handle the growth and Bitcoin holders sell in order to "lock in their gains"

One of these times (we won't know which one until after the fact) the risk perception of BTC vs fiat will invert such that Bitcoin will be regarded as the safe asset. Once that happens, the bubble doesn't pop because it becomes less about the rise of Bitcoin and instead is the flight to safety away from the USD (fiat in general).

Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

no. we've seen perception and buying pressure rise several times during the run ups over the last several years. ppl get MORE bullish with the price rises. it's a feedback loop like justus was saying. and it doesn't just exist in Bitcoin. it's true for all markets.

Yes, but if that were the only factor, than none of the previous price bubbles should have ended before completely collapsing the USD. Certainly of that (let's call it) 55% group, some of them will change their mind in a bull market, but at the same time, when there are rapid gains there is an increase in previously bullish folk changing tunes, under the pretense that we've gone too high to sustain. So an equivalent negative feedback loop?

Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

no. we've seen perception and buying pressure rise several times during the run ups over the last several years. ppl get MORE bullish with the price rises. it's a feedback loop like justus was saying. and it doesn't just exist in Bitcoin. it's true for all markets.

Yes, but if that were the only factor, than none of the previous price bubbles should have ended before completely collapsing the USD. Certainly of that (let's call it) 55% group, some of them will change their mind in a bull market, but at the same time, when there are rapid gains there is an increase in previously bullish folk changing tunes, under the pretense that we've gone too high to sustain. So an equivalent negative feedback loop?

correct, it isn't the only factor.

markets move in cycles or waves; none ever move in a straight line up. this is why i believe there is some validity to technical analysis and i employ it routinely. but i also rely on the fundamentals. there are always periods of bullishness and bearishness which we will continue to see.

It's already a no-brainer to borrow long term in USD and buy and hold BTC.

What we're waiting for to see hyperbitcoinization is for that knowledge to rapidly spread through the pool of potential borrowers.

I think banks are sensitive to this hence the reluctance to accommodate Bitcoin businesses.

FYI in Canada this year I've made 3 deposits to Bitcoin exchanges, and 3 times I've had to visit my bank manager to confirm my accounts have not been compromised. Including 1 new card issue, and to my knowledge no fraud.

Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

no. we've seen perception and buying pressure rise several times during the run ups over the last several years. ppl get MORE bullish with the price rises. it's a feedback loop like justus was saying. and it doesn't just exist in Bitcoin. it's true for all markets.

Yes, but if that were the only factor, than none of the previous price bubbles should have ended before completely collapsing the USD. Certainly of that (let's call it) 55% group, some of them will change their mind in a bull market, but at the same time, when there are rapid gains there is an increase in previously bullish folk changing tunes, under the pretense that we've gone too high to sustain. So an equivalent negative feedback loop?

correct, it isn't the only factor.

markets move in cycles or waves; none ever move in a straight up. this is why i believe there is some validity to technical analysis and i employ it routinesly. but i also rely on the fundamentals. there are always periods of bullishness and bearishness which we will continue to see.

and then there's trend and the trend in Bitcoin has clearly been up.

So this might be a personal question, but seeing as how you're interested in TA of interim price action, does that mean that you actively buy and sell bitcoin? I was smart enough to see where this was headed a long time ago, and that insight has served me well over time. However, I have 0 faith in my ability to predict how and when we get there, so the best plan has always been hold (for me). Perhaps the only reason I come here everyday is to see if we've arrived yet and be amused by all the people charting our course to destinations that must be unknown to them...

Further increases in value would only reinforce this position for some of those folk, would it not?

no. we've seen perception and buying pressure rise several times during the run ups over the last several years. ppl get MORE bullish with the price rises. it's a feedback loop like justus was saying. and it doesn't just exist in Bitcoin. it's true for all markets.

Yes, but if that were the only factor, than none of the previous price bubbles should have ended before completely collapsing the USD. Certainly of that (let's call it) 55% group, some of them will change their mind in a bull market, but at the same time, when there are rapid gains there is an increase in previously bullish folk changing tunes, under the pretense that we've gone too high to sustain. So an equivalent negative feedback loop?

correct, it isn't the only factor.

markets move in cycles or waves; none ever move in a straight up. this is why i believe there is some validity to technical analysis and i employ it routinesly. but i also rely on the fundamentals. there are always periods of bullishness and bearishness which we will continue to see.

and then there's trend and the trend in Bitcoin has clearly been up.

So this might be a personal question, but seeing as how you're interested in TA of interim price action, does that mean that you actively buy and sell bitcoin? I was smart enough to see where this was headed a long time ago, and that insight has served me well over time. However, I have 0 faith in my ability to predict how and when we get there, so the best plan has always been hold (for me). Perhaps the only reason I come here everyday is to see if we've arrived yet and be amused by all the people charting our course to destinations that must be unknown to them...

it looks to me that mining would be best described as being in a Pure Strategy Nash Equilibrium - cypherdocHighlights are mine:

"A pure strategy Nash equilibrium is a profile of strategies such that each player’s (miner's) strategy is a best response ((results in the highest available payoff (block reward)) against the equilibrium strategies of the other players (miners).

A pure strategy Nash equilibrium only requires that the action taken by each agent (miner) be best against the actual equilibrium actions taken by the other players (miners), and not necessarily against all possible actions of the other players (miners). In other words, it's expected for some miners to be malicious.

A Nash equilibrium has the nice property that it is stable: if each player expects 'a' to be the profile of actions played, then no player (miner) has any incentive to change his or her action (no incentive to start cheating). In other words, no player (miner) regrets having played the action that he or she played in a Nash equilibrium."

Nash equilibrium works well in theory, the real world is a little more messy.Pre-mass adoption there are so many outside interests seeking bitcoin failure that there are other incentives at play.Once there is more distribution and buy in, the full effects of the Nash Equilibrium will be much stronger than they are today.

the Nash equilibrium is a solution concept of a non-cooperative game; therefore, i think the Nash Equilibrium takes those hostile actors into account. the minimum # of participants required to apply the theory is 2 and doesn't depend on large #'s. what's also important for all actors to know and understand, and to know that the others know, is that the longest blockchain and the POW required to construct it is mathematically immutable. b/c we know that the hashrate of the Bitcoin Network is thousands of times larger than most of the supercomputers on Earth makes the strategical decision making of each individual actor clear; don't cheat.

Understood, I'm more referring to the folks that are the non-participants in the game. Lest we forget these currently vastly outnumber the participants with respect to potential game resources available to them. Game-ending scenarios are often dismissed as impossible when in fact they are merely unlikely, as are the application of non-monetary/computing power factors. Threats to date have generally been within the game players, and Nash applies well.

In general I not only agree but the also salute the application of the principle.

Consider however the implications if one were to throw something like stuxnet into the works or a fab level exploit into each of the main chip makers, say by coercion or covertly, and subsequently activated? There are defenses certainly, but it would be disruptive and could be timed with other types of interference. Unlikely but possible. Thankfully, we are not under serious attack or opposition, but I'd still give a BTC =~ 0 a >0 p value, and Nash holds the rest in place.

If they instead were one of the nationale who applied bitcoin... They would have had so much wealth.

Sooner or later someone will take the plunge... but not until a few more zero's are added to the right... right now credability within the dev community must be addressed, if the dev community can be trusted to make proper decisions, maybe someone would be interested (and perhaps say we will do it if we have our own developers control the source or something?) but anyways thats the central weakness of the open source model we have with bitcoin, its controlled by a select few and we dont have control over what they do or are coerced to maybe do.